And no Silva doesn't have a stupid plan, it's a completely fine crazy villain plan. He's got a personal vendetta against M, he hatches a plot to ruin and humiliate her, hatches another scheme so he can confront her and see if she's actually willing to admit that his current facial situation is a little problematic, and then goes forward with his ultimate plan of offing her.

It's not complicated, TCD wants it to be. But he wanted more stupid action set-pieces and shit so we've already lost him.

I actually made this very point upthread. The James Bond franchise has never been a clinic on great filmmaking. Which is why I find it strange that I would be criticized for complaining that Skyfall lacked action because A) Bond films are first and foremost action movies and B) why does someone who clearly dislikes so much of a film franchise show up for the 23rd entry?

And here's the bad news for the old school Bond haters: Skyfall was clearly setting up the franchise to return to that approach. So I hope you like crazy gadgets, theatrical villains in ridiculous hideouts, and more fights scene involving some kind of man-eating animal, because I'm willing to be that's what we're getting in Bond 24.

And no Silva doesn't have a stupid plan, it's a completely fine crazy villain plan. He's got a personal vendetta against M, he hatches a plot to ruin and humiliate her, hatches another scheme so he can confront her and see if she's actually willing to admit that his current facial situation is a little problematic, and then goes forward with his ultimate plan of offing her.

It's not complicated, TCD wants it to be. But he wanted more stupid action set-pieces and shit so we've already lost him.

Oh, I see...

So explain to me: Why did Silva allow himself to be captured? And why was he trying to kill the guy who was coming to capture him? And why did the plan Silva had spent years putting into place culminate in him simply walking into a room and opening fire? You know, the plan that was so awesome it was foiled by fire extinguishers.

I actually made this very point upthread. The James Bond franchise has never been a clinic on great filmmaking. Which is why I find it strange that I would be criticized for complaining that Skyfall lacked action because A) Bond films are first and foremost action movies and B) why does someone who clearly dislikes so much of a film franchise show up for the 23rd entry?

And here's the bad news for the old school Bond haters: Skyfall was clearly setting up the franchise to return to that approach. So I hope you like crazy gadgets, theatrical villains in ridiculous hideouts, and more fights scene involving some kind of man-eating animal, because I'm willing to be that's what we're getting in Bond 24.

You can have all the cool Bond stuff with actual attempts at character building and a veneer of complexity. I'm not asking for Theo Angelopoulo to make "Voyage to Skyfall" here. But actively trying to make a real movie instead of stuff just happening on screen because it's an action movie should be the basic goal.

But what am I saying? You think the movie lacks action becasue there's not a bunch of 'set-pieces' so I'm kind of realizing Sebastian was basically right.

So explain to me: Why did Silva allow himself to be captured? And why was he trying to kill the guy who was coming to capture him? And why did the plan Silva had spent years putting into place culminate in him simply walking into a room and opening fire? You know, the plan that was so awesome it was foiled by fire extinguishers.

He probably allowed himself to be captured because "I can hack into MI6 with my super-hacking skills! Of course I've got a back-up plan!" and also because I'm sure he actively wants M to see his face, know what she's done and maybe show some remorse. After that what does he need to do? Tie her to the fucking train tracks or something? He's proved his point, he's wrecked her. There's nothing that puts the exclamation mark on the end of a sentence like "Gunning down the head of British intelligence in front of the prime minister."

And even with all that being said? I don't even think that's like that's some perfect story beat! I just seriously love that this bit fucking broke the movie for you.

Silva's plan was to humiliate M and have the British government disown her, then murder her with his own hands just after that ultimate humiliation. Thus it was important that he kill her at that hearing, vs. putting a pillow over her face whilst she was sleeping at home.

Silva tells us why he allowed himself to be captured: to look at M in the eye "one last time" but also to show her his deformity, to show her what she did to him.

I dug the fact that, as far as Silva is concerned, Bond is just an obstacle to him getting revenge on M. In a way, Bond is the Henchman to M that Silva must fight!

Loved how at the end Silva shows that there's still a lot of love in that love/hate relationship with M, first when he shows concern at her wound, then when he's almost frozen with rage and realizes he can't kill her! Also, M states that Silva had been "going off on his own" (something like that) prior to the trade, was becoming unstable. So she had a motive for selling him out (unless she just lied about that). And if true, maybe Silva is harboring some secret guilt that he'd betrayed M and got what he deserved.

Silva knows M pretty well: his scheme to release the secret identities of spies pre-supposed that M would not just yank them all out of the field immediately. In fact M even lists that as an option then dismisses it!

I also liked how Bond and Silva's roles reversed from the first to the second half (roughly) of the film. In the first half, Bond is out of his element and helpless against the CyberWarefare of Silva. In the second half the roles are reversed, as Silva proves to be pretty rusty with the Commando style attacks. But he's got an ego so doesn't realize it until it's too late.

I also think the conflict between M/Bond and Silva was a conflict between old/new as has been pointed out in this thread. The whole theme of the film is the question of what use Human Intel has in the world with the Interwebz. Bond shows pretty good strategic and tactical sense in pulling Silva to his boyhood home, where he knows the ground and Silva is (relatively) isolated from his fancy hacking skills.

Just to add: I was intriqued by how Patriotism is explored in this film. Bond is screwing and drinking himself to death in Turkey but starts to pull himself together when he sees a TV broadcast of MI6 getting blown up. Silva tries to convince Bond that Patriotism is an obsolete concept, and in a way that is a subtext to M's hearing as well (with Mallory sticking up for M and Tradition!). And its' mentioned several times by Bond and people around him that he is The Stiff Upper Lip Brit par excellance.

Oh and while I like the theme song I really hated the title sequence. Reminded me of Harry Potter and the Haunted Mansion.

You can have all the cool Bond stuff with actual attempts at character building and a veneer of complexity. I'm not asking for Theo Angelopoulo to make "Voyage to Skyfall" here. But actively trying to make a real movie instead of stuff just happening on screen because it's an action movie should be the basic goal.

And they can do all that without sacrificing the elements that make James Bond what he is. As a matter of fact they did. It was called Casino Royale.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega

Probably. Mostly because you seem to like 'em stupid all around.

But what am I saying? You think the movie lacks action becasue there's not a bunch of 'set-pieces' so I'm kind of realizing Sebastian was basically right.

And yet you're the one defending stupidity:

Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega

He probably allowed himself to be captured because "I can hack into MI6 with my super-hacking skills! Of course I've got a back-up plan!" and also because I'm sure he actively wants M to see his face, know what she's done and maybe show some remorse.

So the defense of a boring and overused villain trope is a boring and overused cliche? Yeah, clearly I'm the one who likes stupid things.

And you failed to explain why Silva's goons tried to kill Bond at the casino despite the fact that Silva needed Bond to capture him.

But don't worry, I'll answer for you: It's because the movie needed an action beat so the scene was completely contrived. You know, the hallmark of any intelligent, thoughtfully-crafted film.

Quote:

After that what does he need to do? Tie to the fucking train tracks or something? He's proved his point, he's wrecked her. There's nothing that puts the exclamation mark on the end of a sentence like "Gunning down the head of British intelligence in front of the prime minister."

Here's a thought: How about using his computer to blow up the building she was in? You know, like he already fucking did with MI6 headquarters. But I guess I lack the ability to grasp the subtle genius in Silva enacting a plan that was almost guaranteed to fail (which it did) with the added bonus of pointlessly risking his own life in the process.

Quote:

And even with all that being said? I don't even think that's like that's some pointless story beat! I just seriously love that this bit fucking broke the movie for you.

No, that bit didn't break the movie for me. It was a whole series of bits. Skyfall spent the good part of an hour piling stupid contrivance upon stupid contrivance. And believe me, I know how to recognize stupidity in a movie because of how much I only like stupid movies.

Yeah, that's a cop out. Silva kept it together enough to be the world's greatest hacker and run a small militia, but apparently was too crazy to come up with a coherent plan for a simple assassination.

TCD what you ignore is that Silva was operating out of a deep seated emotional need, not a cold, calculating plan. And he's not too far out of line with other Bond villains in the films or novels. For two:

Goldfinger in the novel wanted to literally steal the gold from Ft. Knox via Choo Choo Train. After murdering everyone on the base. The definition of cool calculation + Bug Fuck Crazy. Goldfinger in the film version just might have gotten away with his plan by framing the Mob/Red Chinese.

Mr. Big in the novel Live and Let Die let's Bond live because he's so fucking bored with running rings around the FBI and CIA and he thinks Bond might be a challenge. Bond responds by attaching a Limpet Mine to Mr. Big's yacht and blowing him up!

I don't dare go into the "Best of bond Let's Get This Over With" thread because if I said the "Goldeneye" is horrible and "Tomorrow Never Dies" is fantastic on that thread, I could be banned from the entire site for life. Oh, wait, those same guys are reading this? Oh Nooooooeeeeeesssssss.

And you failed to explain why Silva's goons tried to kill Bond at the casino despite the fact that Silva needed Bond to capture him.

But don't worry, I'll answer for you: It's because the movie needed an action beat so the scene was completely contrived. You know, the hallmark of any intelligent, thoughtfully-crafted film.

Yeah this I think is the major plot hole of the movie. We have no evidence Silva knows Bond is on his trail; he could be a merc who kills off Silva's assassin to get his payment. Silva's woman (seemingly) does not get the chance to tell Silva about this guy she's bringing 'round the island. But then once Bond is on the island Silva knows all about him.

Unless Silva, like Mr. Big, just wanted to see if Bond was up to a basic challenge.

AA film being well crafted doesn't mean it's perfectly logical and plausible though. Everything Silva did made dramatic sense to me, so the fact that it doesn't 100% hold up to real world scrutiny is ultimately pretty minor. It all *feels* right and I was never taken out of the movie. That takes craft.

Yeah this I think is the major plot hole of the movie. We have no evidence Silva knows Bond is on his trail; he could be a merc who kills off Silva's assassin to get his payment. Silva's woman (seemingly) does not get the chance to tell Silva about this guy she's bringing 'round the island. But then once Bond is on the island Silva knows all about him.

Unless Silva, like Mr. Big, just wanted to see if Bond was up to a basic challenge.
[/quote]

And they can do all that without sacrificing the elements that make James Bond what he is. As a matter of fact they did. It was called Casino Royale.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH! Seriously this is why the conversation is completely breaking down! How is this movie "sacrificing the elements that make James Bond what he is?" compared to Casino Royale?

Like I absolutely can't make sense of that comment.

Quote:

So the defense of a boring and overused villain trope is a boring and overused cliche? Yeah, clearly I'm the one who likes stupid things.

Well yeah...it's kind of obvious.

Look I'm probably fucking harsh to you because the arguments against this movie sound absolutely crazy. I don't think this film has an air-tight plot here, but as whole it's thematically more interesting because it's such a weirdly intimate little story. But you actively seem to think 'Fuck that! It's stupid! I want them to just embrace the stupid and throw the crazy shit everywhere!"

I keep wondering if this is karma for not liking Nolan's Batman movies. In which case I hope Sebastian and MichaelM are laughing like the sick bastards they are!

Quote:

And you failed to explain why Silva's goons tried to kill Bond at the casino despite the fact that Silva needed Bond to capture him.

But don't worry, I'll answer for you: It's because the movie needed an action beat so the scene was completely contrived. You know, the hallmark of any intelligent, thoughtfully-crafted film.

Did Silva's goons get a message from him? Or did they just have orders like "Kill the any dink who messes with my girl?" Because I'm sure that's probably something a guy who's unstable and possessive might order his minions to do.

But yeah! I'll grant you that! It's totally for a cool action beat! A GREAT action beat actually.

Quote:

Here's a thought: How about using his computer to blow up the building she was in? You know, like he already fucking did with MI6 headquarters. But I guess I lack the ability to grasp the subtle genius in Silva enacting a plan that was almost guaranteed to fail (which it did) with the added bonus of pointlessly risking his own life in the process.

BECAUSE HE WANTS TO KILL M FACE TO FACE

Like out of anything in the movie one would think that you'd at least take away the idea that this guy really wants to actually witness M getting killed by his own hands.

Yes, because the last thing we want is for a James Bond movie to be Hollywood. How dreadfully gauche.

So... is everyone else in some alternate universe in which the Bond movies don't have a tradition of flamboyance and spectacle? And are instead artfully-crafted think pieces?

I mean, you guys have seen other James Bond movies, right? Because here's thing: From a technical point of view, they're not particularly good movies. Not big on character development. Not big on profound themes. They're more about explosions than learning things about the human experience.

Now, that's not to say that I don't appreciate the franchise maturing and injecting some high-minded elements (see: Casino Royale). But James Bond still needs to fuck hot women and blow up shit in huge and impressive ways (see: Casino Royale). Because that's kind of the formula.

But apparently, having the audacity to point out that a Bond movie light on action is, in fact, light on action means I hate the films of Kurosawa and generally suck at watching movies. (Which is only partially true. Rashomon is so overrated. I mean what's the deal with all those weird stories?)

It's hard not to take away the idea that "I want these movies to be a lot of explosions and fucking!" kind of suggests that you want them to be ultimately me silly and dumb.

Though fun fact! Bond actually gets more action in this movie than he did in Casino Royale!

A film being well crafted doesn't mean it's perfectly logical and plausible though. Everything Silva did made dramatic sense to me, so the fact that it doesn't 100% hold up to real world scrutiny is ultimately pretty minor. It all *feels* right and I was never taken out of the movie. That takes craft.
Remind me what classic fundamental Bond elements this film lacked that CASINO ROYALE had.

Crazy enough, wasn't all of this the BIG issue of TDK back in 2008? Devin's not complaining.

But I feel the same way here. It just didn't bug me because it all works gangbusters.

TCD what you ignore is that Silva was operating out of a deep seated emotional need, not a cold, calculating plan. And he's not too far out of line with other Bond villains in the films or novels. For two:

Except the movie did set Silva up as cool and calculating. He was meticulous and deliberate, and Q even noted that his plan had been in the works for years.

Quote:

Goldfinger in the novel want to literally steal the gold from Ft. Knox via Choo Choo Train. After murdering everyone on the base. The definition of cool calculation + Bug Fuck Crazy. Goldfinger in the film version just might have gotten away with his plan by framing the Mob/Red Chinese.

Mr. Big in the novel Live and Let Die let's Bond live because he's so fucking bored with running rings around the FBI and CIA and he thinks Bond might be a challenge. Bond responds by attaching a Limpet Mine to Mr. Big's yacht and blowing him up!

As I stated previously, I don't have a problem with bug-fuck crazy villain plots in a Bond movie, at least in terms of objective. Most Bond villains have some ridiculous plan to destroy or takeover the world. But Silva's goal was boring. He just wanted to kill one person. And he did things that ran completely contrary to achieving his goal. I don't mind if a Bond villain plan is convoluted, as long as it follows its own internal logic. Silva was actively trying to kill the guy he needed to have capture him, and then the actual assassination part of his grand plot was about as clever and effective as a smash-and-grab 7-11 robbery.

Except the movie did set Silva up as cool and calculating. He was meticulous and deliberate, and Q even noted that his plan had been in the works for years.

As I stated previously, I don't have a problem with bug-fuck crazy villain plots in a Bond movie, at least in terms of objective. Most Bond villains have some ridiculous plan to destroy or takeover the world. But Silva's goal was boring. He just wanted to kill one person. And he did things that ran completely contrary to achieving his goal. I don't mind if a Bond villain plan is convoluted, as long as it follows its own internal logic. Silva was actively trying to kill the guy he needed to have capture him, and then the actual assassination part of his grand plot was about as clever and effective as a smash-and-grab 7-11 robbery.

His plan wasn't just to kill M. He was literally trying to take away her dignity.

Yeah, that's a cop out. Silva kept it together enough to be the world's greatest hacker and run a small militia, but apparently was too crazy to come up with a coherent plan for a simple assassination.

I compare the relationship directly to Physco. He's obsessed with his mother figure, consumed by her. There's a lovely little beat at the end where he's horrified that M has been shot, but then he wants her dead seconds later any way.

That beat perfectly captures this character and it basically invalidates what YOU guys are saying. He is an amazing terrorist, he is this highly trained incredibly 00 agent like Bond. But at the same time he's suffering from some VERY very deeply seeded physcological issues when it comes to M. He COULD have killed her incredibly easily and with brutal, Bond like efficiency if he wanted to. The entire point of Bond going to Skyfall is to take away every technological/terror advantage Silva might have over him.

As for his plan to kill M at the very end, you don't think storming the place with like ten highly trained killers, and then hitting the building with a fucking helicopter and throwing incendiary grenades into the building methodically is a good plan? They make a point of having Silva be completely annoyed by Bond's almost comical refusal to die, really the franchises refusal to die. I'd love to hear what you have in mind that would be better.

I compare the relationship directly to Physco. He's obsessed with his mother figure, consumed by her. There's a lovely little beat at the end where he's horrified that M has been shot, but then he wants her dead seconds later any way.

That beat perfectly captures this character and it basically invalidates what YOU guys are saying. He is an amazing terrorist, he is this highly trained incredibly 00 agent like Bond. But at the same time he's suffering from some VERY very deeply seeded physcological issues when it comes to M. He COULD have killed her incredibly easily and with brutal, Bond like efficiency if he wanted to. The entire point of Bond going to Skyfall is to take away every technological/terror advantage Silva might have over him.

As for his plan to kill M at the very end, you don't think storming the place with like ten highly trained killers, and then hitting the building with a fucking helicopter and throwing incendiary grenades into the building methodically is a good plan? They make a point of having Silva be completely annoyed by Bond's almost comical refusal to die, really the franchises refusal to die. I'd love to hear what you have in mind that would be better.

Basically, I think Silva detests Bond because he sees the relationship he wishes he had with M. He wants it. He wishes it. But the past speaks volumes for him about her. He thought she'd come in to rescue him. He was the orphan. And when he tried to let death take him away from that deep seated pain of abandonment, it wouldn't have him. So the only thing he came away from the experience with was a purpose to show her in the worst ways possible the judgment he thinks she deserved.

Silva was completely unaware of what he signed up for. Bond was. And that's why the relationship worked out much differently.

Except the movie did set Silva up as cool and calculating. He was meticulous and deliberate, and Q even noted that his plan had been in the works for years.

You're just straight up ignoring his relationship with M now. Why can't he be as capable as a Double 0 and still be a little crazy and unstable when it comes to M? Why can't his relationship with M and being in the same room with her be where the cool calculated dude loses his composure?

This thread is kind of a drag. We have an awesome new Bond movie, the first in four years, and everyone's arguing about how silly the villain's plan was. I like movies to be fairly logical and everything, but isn't there something better to discuss?

This thread is kind of a drag. We have an awesome new Bond movie, the first in four years, and everyone's arguing about how silly the villain's plan was. I like movies to be fairly logical and everything, but isn't there something better to discuss?

I enjoyed seeing the 60's padded door to the new M office. Can Bond please fling a hat on a coat hanger at the start of the next film?

APretty much everything Silva does involves theatricality, metaphors, and generally making statements. He clearly cares a lot about that shit, as much as the blunt outcome (though not to an extent that he would think is reckless, because I'm classic villain fashion he's also insane and megalomaniacally confident) and that informs everything he does, in all its intricacy.

As for the floating casino henchmen, at worst it's an incredibly minor nitpick, and seems easy enough to rationalize in a multitude of ways that are in keeping with the character/story/franchise. Off the top of my head, he lets Bond go through the gauntlet to get to him to keep up appearances - that's what Bond would expect, if it was too easy he'd suspect he was walking into a trap, and by letting things play out the way Bond/MI6 expects they think they ultimately have the upper hand, making it all the more devastating when he turns the tables - and because Silva DOES know Bond and IS megalomaniacally confident in his own machinations, he doesn't doubt that Bond can get to him his way.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH! Seriously this is why the conversation is completely breaking down! How is this movie "sacrificing the elements that make James Bond what he is?" compared to Casino Royale?

Like I absolutely can't make sense of that comment.

Casino Royale had bigger and more action set pieces. I'm pretty sure I made this point in my very first post in this thread.

Quote:

Well yeah...it's kind of obvious.

Just so we're clear... I like action so I'm stupid, but you like cliches and overused tropes and you're a keen-minded cinephile. Is that about right?

Quote:

Look I'm probably fucking harsh to you because the arguments against this movie sound absolutely crazy. I don't think this film has an air-tight plot here, but as whole it's thematically more interesting because it's such a weirdly intimate little story. But you actively seem to think 'Fuck that! It's stupid! I want them to just embrace the stupid and throw the crazy shit everywhere!"

I'm not sure I'm following your criticism here. I think Skyfall is stupid, and I also want it to be more stupid?

And I never said Skyfall wasn't thematically interesting. I said I was disappointed in the subdued nature of its action.

Quote:

Did Silva's goons get a message from him? Or did they just have orders like "Kill the any dink who messes with my girl?" Because I'm sure that's probably something a guy who's unstable and possessive might order his minions to do.

But yeah! I'll grant you that! It's totally for a cool action beat! A GREAT action beat actually.

So that pointless action sequence wasn't stupid at all because you personally liked it. Got it.

Quote:

BECAUSE HE WANTS TO KILL M FACE TO FACE

Like out of anything in the movie one would think that you'd at least take away the idea that this guy really wants to actually witness M getting killed by his own hands.

And of course the best way to achieve an intimate murder is to charge into a room full of people with guns blazing. Because there was absolutely no way a man with the resources Silva had could have pulled off a face-to-face murder. It was literally the only choice he had.